Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 22STCV29218, Date: 2023-02-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV29218    Hearing Date: February 6, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.            INTRODUCTION

On September 8, 2022 Plaintiff Levon Erdoglyan (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Silver Lake Brewery, Inc. (“SLB”), Plotke Plumbing (“Plotke”), Inc., Martin Bros. Plumbing and Sewer Inc. (“MBPS”), which arises from damage to Plaintiff’s property.

On December 28, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for an order authorizing service of the Summons and Complaint on MBPS (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) by serving the California Secretary of State.

II.          LEGAL STANDARD

Corporations Code section 1702, subdivision (a) provides: “If an agent for the purpose of service of process has resigned and has not been replaced or if the agent designated cannot with reasonable diligence be found at the address designated for personally delivering the process, or if no agent has been designated, and it is shown by affidavit to the satisfaction of the court that process against a domestic corporation cannot be served with reasonable diligence upon the designated agent by hand in the manner provided in Section 415.10, subdivision (a) of Section 415.20 or subdivision (a) of Section 415.30 of the Code of Civil Procedure or upon the corporation in the manner provided in subdivision (a), (b) or (c) of Section 416.10 or subdivision (a) of Section 416.20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court may make an order that the service be made upon the corporation by delivering by hand to the Secretary of State, or to any person employed in the Secretary of State's office in the capacity of assistant or deputy, one copy of the process for each defendant to be served, together with a copy of the order authorizing such service. Service in this manner is deemed complete on the 10th day after delivery of the process to the Secretary of State.”  (Corp. Code, § 1702, subd. (a).) 

If the corporation has dissolved, summons may be served on the person who is the trustee of the corporation and of its stockholders or members, or any officer, director or other person having custody or control of its assets, or if no such person can be found, then upon any agent upon whom process might be served at the time of dissolution, or if none can be found, upon proper showing of diligence, then the Secretary of State. (Code Civ. Proc., § 416.20(a); Corp. Code, § 2011(b).)  

III.        DISCUSSION

Plaintiff moves the Court for an order authorizing service of the Summons and Complaint on Defendant by serving the California Secretary of State.

Plaintiff provides evidence that Defendant has been dissolved.  (Boniadi Decl., Exh. D.)  Plaintiff made several attempts, by process server, to serve the only two individuals identified in Defendant’s corporate filings, but all of those attempts proved to be unsuccessful.  (See Id. at ¶¶ 7-9 ; Exhs. A-C.)  Specifically, Plaintiff attempted to serve Defendant’s agent for service/CEO/CFO, Ryan Anthony Martin (“Martin”), five times with no success, at the address listed for the agent for service.  (Id. at ¶ 7, Exh. E.)  Plaintiff also ran a skip trace on Martin, which revealed a residential address for Martin.  (Id. at ¶ 8.)  Plaintiff then attempted to serve Martin at the listed residential address five times, but those attempts were unsuccessful.  (Id.; Exh. F.)  Further, Plaintiff attempted to serve Defendant’s secretary, Roger Dell Burton (“Burton”), at his residence, but after attempting to serve him it was determined that he had been deceased for over a year.  (Id. at ¶ 9; Exh. G.)

Accordingly, the Court finds Plaintiff has sufficiently demonstrated to this Court that neither Defendant’s designated agent for service of process nor Defendant’s sole corporate officer may be served despite Plaintiff’s reasonable diligence.

 Thus, Plaintiff’s motion for an order authorizing service of summons and complaint on the California Secretary of State is GRANTED. 

IV.         CONCLUSION

Plaintiff’s motion for an order authorizing service of summons and complaint on the California Secretary of State is GRANTED. 

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.

Dated this 6th day of February 2023